I did a Podcast this month on how to use technology to increase innovation. Now, I am not a fan of innovation for his interest. If you have something to work, innovation may be bad because it may break what he succeeds. But if this does not work, or works badly, and you look at previous practices by you and others, innovation plays a role in solving a unique problem that cannot be solved or below optimal.
Innovation is difficult, and once entered into an argument with one of the CEO of innovation in the field of innovation soon, and I told him that the path he was likely to lead to being previously, I did so greatly over the course of my career, and unfortunately, I was generally right. I had the worst with Steve Palmer in Microsoft, who really disturbed me before leaving him.
But there are three strong steps that can be used to improve innovation in the company.
The first step: innovation is not a final goal
Innovation is a way to solve a problem, but it is often the best way. It is like looking at surgical screening and thinking that it will be great as a natural practice when it is just great when you lack resources to help everyone and will be a disaster in most other cases. Do not measure people in innovation, and measure them to achieve goals, and if they create to achieve these goals, and the result is successful, you do not punish them either. Often people are punished to do something in a new way, but the company does not simply harm because it was not always done.
Therefore, innovation is a tool, and to ensure that this tool is not misused, you need to put it in a context with the result. If someone started something and hit it because they did not bother to learn the right way, then it must be punished, however, if someone who faces an inappropriate problem is innovative and still fails, they should not be punished because they, even through their failure, use innovation properly.
Dadm
One of the most successful ways to pay innovation is to create Dadm Project difference. These are the highly qualified people who understand the problem deeply but tend to be rebel. What you are doing is to send them to a site from the company, give them a decent budget, provide them with basic resources, then remove the unnecessary restrictions that companies have placed on employees.
I saw this work several times when we were struggling to create a product that meets a unique or customer who needs to think outside the box to get there. Some of the most innovative IBM products have been created in this way. After I worked at IBM, inside the company, I noticed that there were nearly a large number of people who would prevent an innovative approach instead of trying to implement it. This was due to a number of issues, such as fear of overcoming it, fear of stupid appearance in the face of a better solution, fear of losing the situation to a better solution, and fear of change. An effort working for the skin, can wander all this and lead to a much faster and better solution than it has been accomplished in the company.
Tolerance is tolerated with failure
Innovation comes with a high possibility of failure that is in line with its high potential to achieve a sudden success. But if people fear failure, they will be afraid to try anything new, and therefore they will not be able to innovate from the problem they find themselves. This was one of the “discussions” I had with the CEO of the old Ford company, and he agreed that it should be tolerant with errors, but then he said that anyone had made a mistake in capturing the F-150. This means that he was not tolerant of errors and that the F-150 was in danger.
You need the approach of carrots and sticks, but if someone undergoes the risk of innovation and its success, it must be rewarded publicly and must be part of the dialog box on the rewards for the mistakes that he committed and that ultimately led to the success that transmits this failure, as long as it was on the path of success. The stick is intended for people who create when you do not need to be innovated, which leads to a failure that can be avoided. People who are invented because they do not want to do their homework because they harm their company.
Closing: What Amnesty International brings to the table
Therefore, you can make innovation part of the construction process, you can create the darkening actions to focus on innovation on a difficult problem, and you can reward good innovation practices and punish bad practices, so what does artificial intelligence bring this process?
Amnesty International can create understandable variables of machine speeds, and offers such as NVIDIA’s OMNIVERSE can simulate the result in virtual environments until the cost of these errors is reduced. Through artificial intelligence tools, you can quickly fail at an anxious pace that can destroy companies if this failure is in the real world and affects real people. But with strong simulation devices, you can test the display in Metaverse so that no real person is damaged, and the knowledge of the voltage in the company remains.
Therefore, AI can perform two floors, one allows one of them to create truly multiple solutions concepts, and provides, in Metaverse, a way to test the most urgent group in very safe ways, especially greatly from the possibility of a positive result.
In short, although I was not a fan of rapid failure, to a large extent due to the damage to the company and its reputation if this failure is announced, you can do the rapid failure faster and safely, making it a more life path to success.
